Kiwi303 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Just buy the HAL Tejas with the Rafales electronics with the Meteor and ASRAAM upgrades and Naval Strike Missile. It's what I would be doing if I was Defence minister here and had the budget. I'd prefer the Typhoons radar to the Rafales, but the Tejas's nose cone isn't big enough to fit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Just buy the HAL Tejas with the Rafales electronics with the Meteor and ASRAAM upgrades and Naval Strike Missile. It's what I would be doing if I was Defence minister here and had the budget. I'd prefer the Typhoons radar to the Rafales, but the Tejas's nose cone isn't big enough to fit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lprigan1 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 before the F111s etc were turned loose. Stealth is good but why take a chance? If stealth fails after you have air superiority and control of the battlefield, it's not fatal. But, hey, my name's not "Chuck" Horner and I am not a retired 4-star general. (So I wouldn't know). Hi SrPliot - agreed with all you say. The IAF has been very successful in converting the F16D into one of the most modern and capable aircraft around - TheF16I http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/ In this regard, it is interesting to note that the IAF, being the one Air Force in the world with the most air to air engagements since the 1950's and the most likely to be engaged in air to air combat in the future (i.e. agsinst Iran, Syria etc) has a very minimal order of F35s - 14 confirmed and an option for 17 more. Originally it was intended that the F22 ( a very beautiful and capable aircraft) would replace the aging fleet of 200+ F15s and F16s but due to US export restrictions this never happened. The F35 just doesn't fit the bill (though it might be useful for stealth attacks on for example, Iranian Nuclear reactors) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lprigan1 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 before the F111s etc were turned loose. Stealth is good but why take a chance? If stealth fails after you have air superiority and control of the battlefield, it's not fatal. But, hey, my name's not "Chuck" Horner and I am not a retired 4-star general. (So I wouldn't know). Hi SrPliot - agreed with all you say. The IAF has been very successful in converting the F16D into one of the most modern and capable aircraft around - TheF16I http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/ In this regard, it is interesting to note that the IAF, being the one Air Force in the world with the most air to air engagements since the 1950's and the most likely to be engaged in air to air combat in the future (i.e. agsinst Iran, Syria etc) has a very minimal order of F35s - 14 confirmed and an option for 17 more. Originally it was intended that the F22 ( a very beautiful and capable aircraft) would replace the aging fleet of 200+ F15s and F16s but due to US export restrictions this never happened. The F35 just doesn't fit the bill (though it might be useful for stealth attacks on for example, Iranian Nuclear reactors) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 the F35 is in trouble if it encounters a squadron of SU35 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cscotthendry Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875New stealth fighter is dead meat in an air battle by DAVID AXE A test pilot has some very, very bad news about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The pricey new stealth jet can’t turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire, the pilot reported following a day of mock air battles back in January. “The F-35 was at a distinct energy disadvantage,” the unnamed pilot wrote in a scathing five-page brief that War Is Boring has obtained. The brief is unclassified but is labeled “for official use only.” DUH! The test pilot obviously missed the elephant in the room. The F35 was never meant to be a viable anything, except profit generator for the military industrial complex. That's why the specification was open-ended and why governments everywhere are being pressured by the US government into buying these duds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 Still, it's good to see they're buying the Hawkei. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-05/federal-government-set-to-spend-13bn-on-new-army-vehicles/6827164 I know a couple of people who work at the Thales plant in Bendigo who were worried about their futures if this contract didn't get up. Looks a hell of a lot better than the Humvee, for one thing it's got the V-shaped hull which deflects IED blasts which the Hummer didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdseye Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 I was told another issue with the Humvee was that it's flat bottom caused it to stick fast to the glacial clays found across Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 It's designed to be the same width as tank tracks, (so I'm told). Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted October 6, 2015 Author Share Posted October 6, 2015 so is Mal getting the "coalition of the willing" back together for one more tour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 It's designed to be the same width as tank tracks, (so I'm told). Nev That would make shipping easier if they only have to strengthen one portion of the surface of aircraft et al... leave the rest strong enough to handle feet and not much more to save weight. I always wondered why such a WIDE big sucker for a 4 person capacity when a defender 110 which is much smaller can carry 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 $1.3B for 1000 of these new vehicles, they want to be good at $1.3M each certainly an upsell from the defenders.. Possibly our govt subsidising enough to get critical mass so they can then gear up for exports.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 They Hummer was designed as a soft skin vehicle then modified to try and protect the occupants. This vehicle was designed from the ground up to protect the occupants. Its like comparing apples and oranges. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 $1.3B for 1000 of these new vehicles, they want to be good at $1.3M each certainly an upsell from the defenders..Possibly our govt subsidising enough to get critical mass so they can then gear up for exports.. Certainly a bit more than the $2,500 or so they're getting for each of the 110's going at auction. Mind you most of them are from the 80's so they've had 30 years of careful Sunday driving by the Army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdseye Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 It's designed to be the same width as tank tracks, (so I'm told). Nev Which is why it got stuck when the depth of the ruts equaled the height of the suspension. Sucked on rather than off, if you get my drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 the F35 is in trouble if it encounters a squadron of SU35 They seem to put all their faith in nobody being able to see the F-35. Stealth or not, missiles to this day still don't have a great record for reliability. Hypothetically, if the F-35 has a couple drop away, another couple go crazy and the rest miss, the only option is to run. If the opposition has radar technology to pick up a decent signature, then it's a bad time to be in an aircraft that is 100 kts slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 The real challenge for anyone will be getting in range for a close combat engagement without being out numbered as one of two of yours become burning wrecks. The challenge for the countries using F35's will be to overcome that huge cost and disadvantage when the others go to masses of unmanned high speed long range drones that the F35 simply hasn't got enough weapons or pilots on board to deal with. If China cant make or buy something to compete with F35's they will makes something cheap that simply outnumbers them and the cost of one F35 buys a lot of semi disposable jet drones capable of carrying some serious weapons. How would 2- 4x F35 handle 20 - 30 x J-11's or 50-100 jet drones in any scenario. They might take a few out and run, but they simply cant carry enough weapons. The biggest, best and fastest doesn't always win, especially with and F35 price tag attached. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 You can buy a lot of missiles for the cost of a single F35, take out the air tankers, ground fuel storage and supply vehicles and the F35 is a hangar queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Everything DrZoos is saying will come true, I'd imagine, with air to air battle. Even getting away from air to air, the ground to air missile technology is getting quite serious. Take the new Russian S-350 for example. The day is fast approaching where first world powers cannot take out the air defences of lesser nations. The only plan they seem to have these days is an almost religious belief in stealth capabilities. Stealth is not as great as they're trying to tell us, in my opinion. Future technology might change things very quickly in the near future. It will be interesting to see how some things the Russians are bragging about will turn out in reality. One of their latest research projects is the old force field caper. They claim a super high frequency microwave shield will destroy any missile or aircraft in a 10klm radius. Whether it will work or not is another question. Who know, it might fry everyone's brains within that radius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 I can think of one easy(ish) way to destroy stealth bombers and fighters... never even needing to light up a radar onboard the attacker. Ground based radar tuned to exhaust plumes and turbulence, tied to a skin paint normal radar... any exhaust plume and air disturbance showing a plane moving combined with no hit from the skin paint has a IR camera equipped fighter vectored in. Cryogenic cooled IR camera tracks in on even just the skin heat of a aircraft moving at more than Mach 0.5, Laser designator slaved to the camera lights it up and a AAM with the radar seeker replaced with a laser head homes on the laser dot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Willy are you referring to EMP weapons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Willy are you referring to EMP weapons? The article I read would be lost by now, probably about a month ago. But I'd guess that's what they would have been talking about. I remember reading about the US experimenting with a similar thing a few years back, but for ground based defence eg; base perimeters. It would be interesting to see if that type of technology would work for air defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 The article I read would be lost by now, probably about a month ago. But I'd guess that's what they would have been talking about. I remember reading about the US experimenting with a similar thing a few years back, but for ground based defence eg; base perimeters. It would be interesting to see if that type of technology would work for air defence. If its ground based they where prob talking about microwave guns?? Fromm what i read, EMP is best used at high altitude as its most effective when bounced of the atmosphere...they may have a new version of it...but i could be totally wrong I noticed the Japs have already developed technology to see most Stealth aircraft...so far they only have a version that requires a recon aircraft, but it wont be long and they will develop it in other formats.ie ground or marine The russians certainly have some very serious electronic weapons already. check out the pain ray which causes so much pain to the skin with no burns that even a trained marine runs from it. This is more for crowd comtrol, but it demonstrates whats happening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willedoo Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 If its ground based they where prob talking about microwave guns?? Fromm what i read, EMP is best used at high altitude as its most effective when bounced of the atmosphere...they may have a new version of it...but i could be totally wrong Not sure if this is the one I read about. This is a microwave based mobile cannon. https://www.rt.com/news/267187-shf-cannon-russia-drones/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Interestingly in this same article they talk about swarming drones In April this year, the US Navy released a video detailing its LOCUST technology – a new tool allowing multiple drones to coordinate and swarm the enemy. Reportedly, it’s designed to protect large US vessels. However, when armed with warheads they turn into offensive weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now